I see several problem with this idea.
1) I don't know exactly how a picture search like you described is implemented, but it is definitely not done by comparing each image with the content of a database. As far as I know images with certain content are found by analyzing the image in question by edge detection for example and comparing the the result with a parameter set, which is thought of representable of the kind of image you are looking for. I guess in the case of child porn it would be shapes and color schemes.
The analysis of text, if unencrypted, is of course a lot easier than analyzing images, but how would you find the parameters to differentiate between copy protected text and non-protected text?
2) If you give up the comparing scheme used for images, you need to compare a questionable text to a data base.Therefore you would need a data base of all copyrighted text in digital form. Since we know that not all text published in print are available in digital form to the publisher, how would it be created? Using the pirated versions from the darknet?
3) Even if you had a data base like that, you would need to determine which data sent through the web you have to check against it. I don't think key words would do it. Just think about any of the books from PG. What do you think how many of the words would you need to find it as an exact match in google with only a few or better none links to citations?
If you use need an exact match you need most of the text, which gets close to checking every possible text exchanged in the web. Even more, if you try to find key word for all possible text you probably end up with a dictionary worth of words. And with them you would find not only the copyrighted text but all citations, discussion, reviews and exerts of that text.
4) I'm against copyright infringements. I think the creators of media content should be paid for their work. But I don't think copyright infringement can or should be used to give anyone - either a government or even worth private companies - the right to check, read or analyze the communication of their citizen or customers at their will. That does sound way too much 1984 to me.
5) Lets leave out all of the above points for a moment. Lets say you have found a text sent from person A to person B that matches a copyrighted text in its entirety. How do you determine if this exchange was legal or not? I have the PID of my friend Iliad put into my Mobipocket account and I do send him the books I bought and downloaded. As far as I know that is legal, but how would you know? (Just a side thought: American lawyer have not the best track record of knowing or accepting the national law of other countries.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
If you think of a cable company that can determine, through their cable box, that you are illicitly sharing your cable with others, they can simply shut off your service, then send you a notice informing you of your violation of their agreement, their demand that you pay a fine, and a threat to send your case to the authorities if you refuse (and even if you don't). An ISP could use that same method to exact punishment for illegal activities.
|
The cable company does this for its own good. It will loose money on customers sharing one connection. They might even profit from punishing some innocent customers, the ISP does not. The ISP does not loose money through the copyright infringements of its customers. It will only loose money if it cuts customers off. You would need to find a very convincing reason for them to do as you suggested.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
Edit: No, I wouldn't consider that ideal. Ideal would be the ISP getting in touch with you with the accusation that you have been disseminating copywritten works without authorization, and charging you to contact them to prove legality OR be cut off. I mean, this isn't child porn...
|
In most non-totalitarian system the justice works with "innocent until the guild is proved". I thought the United States were still one of them. If they are, why would the customer have to prove his innocence?
I'm all for a system that is better that DRM to protect the creators of media, but I don't think this is one. Sorry.